Hi all, Considering that at this point it is James vs. the world, and has been for quite some time ... have we flogged this dead horse enough yet? [1]
--Ed [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:HORSEMEAT On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:00 PM, James Salsman <[email protected]> wrote: > Thomas Morton wrote: > > > > If you know nothing about surveys or statistics it is probably a good > idea > > not to describe a properly calculated metric (yes, I sat down and did the > > math) as absurd.... > > I stand by my statement that trying to pin down donor opinion on > whether they approve of meeting or exceeding market pay to a 1% margin > of error with a 99% confidence interval is completely unnecessary. If > a survey with a few hundred respondents turns out to be ambiguous, > additional donors could be surveyed later. I have been trying to > discuss this with Tom off-list. > > Pine wrote: > > > > I'm a little confounded as to why you're still looking to Glassdoor as > your > > primary source of information on employee satisfaction after Gayle > indicated > > that she has much more comprehensive data on this subject from the > employee > > survey.... > > Please have a look at the slides from that survey at > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB5m5AHoGno&t=60m -- Particular > questions I have about the employee engagement survey so far include: > > (1) Is a survey of 84 respondents which asks age, marital status, > ethnicity, gender, department, tenure, and organizational level an > anonymous survey, or would nearly all of such responses be personally > identifiable? Glassdoor offers much stronger anonymity, > > (2) In general, were there any questions pertaining to whether > employees are satisfied with their pay? I can see none on any of the > report slides. I do see questions pertaining to "recognition" which > are repeatedly identified as problem areas. Pay is by far the largest > complaint on Glassdoor from both satisfied and unsatisfied employees, > but it does not appear to have been measured on the Foundation's > survey. At 1:12:30 it is said that the slide deck will be made public. > I hope we get to see the list of questions too. > > (3) The slide at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB5m5AHoGno&t=65m is > astounding. What does it mean that all three of the executive > respondents completely agreed with the statements that "we treat > everyone with dignity and respect" and "we consistently hire strong > talent and recognize strong performers" but only 54% and 52% of the > twenty-four managers responding agreed, respectively? > > (4) The top two questions at > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB5m5AHoGno&t=65m45s indicate that > those who have been working for the Foundation for more than two years > have very profoundly different assessments of both recognition (which, > again, seems to be the closest thing to pay that the survey asked > about) and the competence of people in key positions compared to newer > employees. Do we want to trust employees opinion in proportion to > their experience with the organization? > > (5) At https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB5m5AHoGno&t=68m "attracting > skilled individuals for hiring" is identified as a specific > improvement need. How is it being addressed? > > David Gerard wrote: > > Anyone in IT knows that there's such a thing as "charity scale", where > > you get paid less because you're working for a nonprofit in exchange > > for less stress and/or doing actual good in the world. > > The slide at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB5m5AHoGno&t=62m10s > indicates that in comparison against 120 corporations and 7 > non-profits who have participated in similar surveys over the past > seven years, the Foundation scored in the 76th percentile on this > survey. I am not sure that reflects very well, given the state of the > economy over that time period. > > I do believe paying people more does lower their stress and attract > and retain more talent. Although there is apparently no shortage of > opinion to the contrary, I have yet to see any data in agreement with > those opinions. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
